If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

That must be it. And having a baby saves marriages (according to hormonal psycho Gidget logic), so anytime some woman is pregnant it's because she's desperate.

Adopting one child or even two seems reasonable. Adopting 10 means one of two things: either the couple is very religious and believes God has a reason for entrusting them with so many, or the couple is really desperate to avoid each other. I assume the former case does not apply here.

I have seen deeply religious families adopt more than one child at once, and I have known one to adopt seven within the span of several years, after their church pledged and gave a great deal of help. The non-religious tend to be less tolerant of such large multiple adoptions, especially since they have no spiritual rationale in the matter and judge the process by its financial fallout alone. For such couples, adopting a large number of children at once usually indicates the need to fill the space between the spouses/partners with some very large distraction.

Gays tend to adopt (at least now) because that is the only way they can get their own children (outside of heterosexual marriage/relationships) in some states, but that is changing rapidly. Once gay men feel it is their "civil right" to use a living woman as a womb and then discard her, they will produce their own designer babies and leave adoption for the poor gay men who can't afford the luxury of a disposable uterus with attached female soul.

Gay women will have to demand that the procedure with two eggs (and one empty sperm cell cover) be subsidized by Obamacare so they can give birth to their own real biological children, who will have both their DNA. The only good thing I can say for that is that at least it doesn't make use of a person--only a dime-a-dozen sperm cell cover.

Adopting one child or even two seems reasonable. Adopting 10 means one of two things: either the couple is very religious and believes God has a reason for entrusting them with so many, or the couple is really desperate to avoid each other. I assume the former case does not apply here.

I have seen deeply religious families adopt more than one child at once, and I have known one to adopt seven within the span of several years, after their church pledged and gave a great deal of help. The non-religious tend to be less tolerant of such large multiple adoptions, especially since they have no spiritual rationale in the matter and judge the process by its financial fallout alone. For such couples, adopting a large number of children at once usually indicates the need to fill the space between the spouses/partners with some very large distraction.

Gays tend to adopt (at least now) because that is the only way they can get their own children (outside of heterosexual marriage/relationships) in some states, but that is changing rapidly. Once gay men feel it is their "civil right" to use a living woman as a womb and then discard her, they will produce their own designer babies and leave adoption for the poor gay men who can't afford the luxury of a disposable uterus with attached female soul.

Gay women will have to demand that the procedure with two eggs (and one empty sperm cell cover) be subsidized by Obamacare so they can give birth to their own real biological children, who will have both their DNA. The only good thing I can say for that is that at least it doesn't make use of a person--only a dime-a-dozen sperm cell cover.

Unreal how you can take the wrong side of any discussion! Were you brought up by two dads? Moms? Or a normal household where you just went deviant.

First- note that all we know about these people is what we have read in this article. From that, we are told that these two men started off to adopt one child, and through circumstances and apparently some dedicated social workers, they ended up with ten kids. There was an article in the St Pete Times today about a couple locally who had twelve kids; three biological, eight adopted, one foster. The stories were pretty similar and in almost all of these large adopted families you read about starting with one kid and then coming to the rescue of a sibling group.

Nothing in this article suggests that these people are anything but happy with their lives, given the alternative possibilities. Would those kids like to be the natural children of the Huxtables? Probably; even biological children sometimes fantasize about having different parents or circumstances. There are damned few Huxtables out there, and the ones who are don't appear to be as interested in adopting as some more work a day people.

I was indeed brought up in a family which was unusual compared to many people I have since met. My parents were happily married for 50 years before my dad died. I had an idyllic childhood surrounded by grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, and more distant relations. There just aren't a lot of those kinds of families anymore. In fact, right here on Family Values Central we have a man who is proud of the fact that he lives no where near his children and grandkids.

I would be curious as to if the gay couple is receiving any income for any of the ten children.

Often times the checks keep coming in after the adoption. Of course there is also Medicaid, EBT, and SSI.

Why do I get the feeling there is more to this story?

Someone asked the same question today about the couple in Pasco County with twelve kids.

Yes, some adopted kids come with benefits to make them more adoptable, and foster kids come with a monthly payment of some sort. If all of these kids were fosters, then I think these guys would get a whopping $5000 a month for the maintenance of ten kids. But these aren't foster kids, they are adopted, according to the article.

But just for fun, let's say that they are getting some money or benefits for the kids. How much is too much? How much would it cost to keep these kids in foster care and case management not to mention the possibility of juvenile detention or prison?